I won't lie, I am a huge supporter of universal healthcare. Its the absolute most liberal-socialist thing about me. Had a friend in college with cancer and no insurance when he was diagnosed. Basically destroyed his family.

I truly believe that if we are to be the greatest country in the world we need to treat our dregs with as much respect and dignity as is afforded to those who can. And I believe whole heartedly that we can and should be able to afford healthcare for one and all.

That being said, I hate social security, and if we don't have a system whereby everyone can get healthcare with government assistance, we shouldn't allow anyone to get healthcare by government assistance. So I am fine with not raising the debt ceiling, but lets can medicare and social security. I'm sure all the old people, especially the old poorer right leaning folks, would love that. It meets the same needs and claims the GOP is calling for right now. Defund it all I say.

Tragedy of the Commons does not apply. Medical treatment is not a limited resource. Use a graduated, progressive single payer system combined with a strong, health care education system. Like I said, there can be no perfect system. Disease happens. People die.

Virtually every resource is a limited resource. Especially one bound by as much regulation as Healthcare.

And single payer systems all have a budget. That is a limited resource.

Patient A receiving an cutting-edge surgery to try to add a year or two to his life might cost as much as insulin for a few hundred Patient B diabetics over the same timeframe.

Give Patient A unfettered access to the "commons" (the single payer budget) and he'll take whatever he needs. All those Patient B's would get to fight over whatever's left.

For that reason, all single payer systems feature a gatekeeper to the "commons" Employing spreadsheets and formulas (or even who's who lists) to determine what Patient A is really worth compared to Patients B.

Well Funded Patient C gets to laugh at all of them and see his own provider who doesn't dink around with Patients A, B or their gatekeeper.

I won't lie, I am a huge supporter of universal healthcare. Its the absolute most liberal-socialist thing about me. Had a friend in college with cancer and no insurance when he was diagnosed. Basically destroyed his family.

I truly believe that if we are to be the greatest country in the world we need to treat our dregs with as much respect and dignity as is afforded to those who can. And I believe whole heartedly that we can and should be able to afford healthcare for one and all.

That being said, I hate social security, and if we don't have a system whereby everyone can get healthcare with government assistance, we shouldn't allow anyone to get healthcare by government assistance. So I am fine with not raising the debt ceiling, but lets can medicare and social security. I'm sure all the old people, especially the old poorer right leaning folks, would love that. It meets the same needs and claims the GOP is calling for right now. Defund it all I say.

Personally, I think this is a much better idea than what we're doing now.

Insurance's main contribution to this problem is that it makes you not care whether you pay $100 or $1,000 for that CT. Single payer doesn't make you care either. It makes everyone not care. Except the gatekeeper. He gets to care for you. Which is kind of ironic, considering all the talk about not wanting government to come between (Half of) people and their doctors.

Insurance's main contribution to this problem is that it makes you not care whether you pay $100 or $1,000 for that CT. Single payer doesn't make you care either. It makes everyone not care. Except the gatekeeper. He gets to care for you. Which is kind of ironic, considering all the talk about not wanting government to come between (Half of) people and their doctors.

Anyway, the real problem with health care is it's neccessity, combined with how removed consumers are from cost. And I guess add in a sprinkle of how complex (difficult to comprehend for the consumer) the product offering is.

I'm kinda sorta paraphrasing something I read somewhere before, but imagine if you went car shopping knowing you were only going to pay for 10% (out of pocket) of whatever car it is you chose to buy.

Most of us would make some pretty extravagant decisions that would never occur to us if we were writing a check for the whole bill. Also imagine that the car salesman already knows you're only paying 10% of the cost. Do you think he's going to show us the $6,000 well-maintained 2004 Civic in the back that is maybe really all we need?

No, he's taking us to the factory-new car lot. And only selling top of the line. And we'll buy it.

I work for a small privately owned company. I can't afford $800-$1000 a month for health insurance. Someone tell me how this healthcare plan is suppose to help the common person?

Oh that's right, that's not what it's intention is. It may have started that way, but when Obama made a closed door deal with the insurance lobbyists to get the legislation passed everything changed. No goverment healthcare offered, just buy insurance on "the free market" or else.....

Anyway, the real problem with health care is it's neccessity, combined with how removed consumers are from cost. And I guess add in a sprinkle of how complex (difficult to comprehend for the consumer) the product offering is.

I'm kinda sorta paraphrasing something I read somewhere before, but imagine if you went car shopping knowing you were only going to pay for 10% (out of pocket) of whatever car it is you chose to buy.

Most of us would make some pretty extravagant decisions that would never occur to us if we were writing a check for the whole bill. Also imagine that the car salesman already knows you're only paying 10% of the cost. Do you think he's going to show us the $6,000 well-maintained 2004 Civic in the back that is maybe really all we need?

No, he's taking us to the factory-new car lot. And only selling top of the line. And we'll buy it.

And yet if you attempt to address those issues you get idiots from Alaska calling it a death panel.

Republican Rep. Peter King said Friday that his Republican colleague in the Senate, Ted Cruz, "is a fraud" who will "no longer have any influence in the Republican Party" after the House votes on a measure that could potentially lead to a government shutdown.